This week in disorganized America, we discuss twenty-inch rims on the Presidential limo, Russian nationalists battle the cops, bailout money staying in bankers’ pockets, and more. We’re joined this week by Tan Staafl from the Age of Treason blog, check it out!

Comments

21 Responses to “Dietrich and Mishko, 11/07/2008”

whodareswings on
November 8th, 2008 12:39 pm

My former housemate writing under the name “Neal Camberly” for the National Alliance website started the meme, picked up later by Judicial-biz.org, that Hugh Hefner is a Jew. He based his suspicions on a televised Jewish wedding he’d seen in which Hefner was a groom. Hefner married Jewess Barbie Benton in a Jewish ceremony (I believe). This is probably what he’d seen. He may have married another Jewess later, I don’t know, but in a recently released biography of him it flatly states his parents, who were both Christians, met at a church social. If there is some evidence to the contrary that Hefner is Judiac then let’s to see it.

Word to the wise: Judicial-biz.org is entertaining, but often not very accurate. Information there can be skewed and more than a few of the photos have nothing to do with accompanying texts.

Reck,Less:Abandon on
November 8th, 2008 3:33 pm

OK I lied. Here comes a little more constructive criticism , this time aimed at Mokie, Mishko:O’Riley. Please stop butting in and disrupting people’s train of thought when there talking, and trying to take over and steer the show. let them finish first. Just stick to the funny jew shtick. And trying to impress everyone with your great knowledge, and not giving D money.Thanks. Your here to Edjamacate the masses, not browbeat and belittle everyone. So charming.

Question for Susie; What would be the reason for you laughing at me, after reading my comment on the dollar being a measurement of weight of precious metal, and not a paper fraudulent reserve note? I wasn’t attacking.

Guess this is exactly what Peter is talking about, AH’s like me, WHATEVER!

Hey Reckless maybe you could be a host and do your own show and show us all how it’s done. The door is always open, email me at rabbi@vornetwork.com and we can talk about it…..

BTW – Your comments about the dollar being a measurement of weight of precious metal is a lie, plain and simple. We are NOT on a gold standard, how many times do I have to tell you this?

I do wait your reply, or you can skype me at mark_in_cali, I’ll be on the rest of the day…..

Reck,Less:Abandon on
November 8th, 2008 8:22 pm

Did you just call me a lair! I don’t get where you think I lie, and think we are on a gold standard. What I am saying is FRNs are not themselves “lawful money”. How many times do I have to say it, a Federal Reserve Note is NOT a dollar. It is not Federal, there is no reserve and a note is an, I Owe You, Correct ? People are confused on this point because of the insidious manner in which FRNs “evolved” – actually, degenerated is a more appropriate verb – from the late 1920s until today. FRNs of Series 1928 through Series 1950E carried the obligation “The United States of America will pay to the bearer on demand [some number of] dollars.” Prior to 1934, the notes carried the inscription “Redeemable in gold on demand at the United States Treasury, or in gold or lawful money at any Federal Reserve Bank.” After 1934, the notes carried the inscription “this note * * * is redeemable in lawful money at the United States Treasury, or at any Federal Reserve Bank” (post-1934). Starting with Series 1963, the words “will pay to the bearer on demand” no longer appear; and each FRN simply states a particular denomination in “dollars.”With and after Series 1963, the promise of redemption also vanished from the face of each note. Thus, on their faces FRNs became, in the apt description of banking expert John Exter, an “I.O.U. Nothing” currency. This change in the mere language printed on FRNs could not transform their legal character, however. If FRNs were not “dollars” when they explicitly promised to pay in gold or “lawful money,” they did not magically become “dollars” when they stopped explicitly promising to pay in anything at all.
The situation with coinage is more complex, but equally (if not more) confusing. The United States Code provides for three different types of coinage denominated in “dollars”: namely, base- metallic coinage, gold coinage, and silver coinage.
The base-metallic coinage consists of “a dollar coin,” weighing “8.1 grams,” “a half dollar coin,” weighing “11.34 grams”; “a quarter coin,” weighing “5.67 grams”: and “a dime coin,” weighing “2.268 grams. All of these coins are composed of copper and nickel. The weights of the dime, the quarter, and the half dollar are in the correct arithmetical proportions, the one to each of the others. But the “dollar” is disproportionately light (or the other coins disproportionately heavy). In this series of base metallic coins, then, the questions naturally arise: Is the “dollar” a cupro-nickel coin weighing “8.1 grams”? Or is it two cupro- nickel coins (or four or ten coins) collectively weighing 22.68 grams? Or is it both? Or is it neither, but something else altogether, to which the weights of these coins are irrelevant?
Similarly, the gold coinage consists of “[a] fifty dollar gold coin” that “weighs 33.931 grams, and contains one troy ounce of fine gold”; “[a] twenty-five dollar gold coin” that “contains one-half ounce of fine gold”; “[a] ten dollar gold coin” that “contains one fourth ounce of fine gold”; and “[a] five dollar gold coin” that “contains one tenth ounce of fine gold. The “fifty dollar,” “twenty-five dollar,” and “five dollar” coins are in the correct arithmetical proportions each to the others. But the “ten dollar” coin is not. Therefore, is a “dollar” one-fiftieth or one-fortieth of an ounce of gold? Or both? Or neither?
And what is the logical, economic, or other relationship between a “dollar” that contains “8.1 grams” of copper and nickel, and a “dollar” that consists of 0.679 grams of gold alloy?
Finally, the silver coinage consists of a coin that is inscribed “One Dollar,” weighs “31.103 grams,” and is supposed to contain one ounce of .”999 fine silver.”13
What is the rational relationship between this “dollar” of “31.103 grams” of “.999 fine silver,” a “dollar” containing 0.679 grams of gold alloy, and a “dollar” containing “8.1 grams” of base metals? Obviously, these are not the amounts of the metals that exchange against each other in the free market – that is, the different weights of different metals do not reflect equivalent purchasing powers. So, on what theory are each of these disparate weights, and purchasing powers, equally “dollars”?
Currency of “equal purchasing power” The United States Code provides no answer to this perplexing question. Indeed, it mandates that the question should not even be capable of being asked. For the Code commands that “the Secretary [of the Treasury] shall redeem gold certificates owned by the Federal reserve banks at times and in amounts the Secretary decides are necessary to maintain the equal purchasing power of each kind of United States currency.
One need be no expert in currency transactions to know that a “fifty-dollar” gold coin has significantly more purchasing power than a “fifty-dollar” FRN or than fifty cupro-nickel “dollars,” and that a “one-dollar” silver coin has significantly more purchasing power than a “one-dollar” FRN or one cupro-nickel “dollar.” Thus, one need be no expert in administrative law to realize that the Secretary of the Treasury has defaulted on his obligation to keep all forms of “United States currency” at parity with each other – that is, to maintain a “dollar” of the same purchasing-power, whether it be composed of gold, silver, or base metals. Dude, This is not a pissing contest here.
The Federal Reserve System is a private Corp. that loans it’s toilet paper to the U.S.[another Private Corp.] where all citizens,public and private land are collateral, and the IRS. is its Big Vinney [Private]collection agency. Yes the money taken in by the IRS goes straight in to the private share holders pockets. Not everyone knows this, and must be edjamakated….. and not called STUPID! Yes I’m a palagerest with a very warped seance of hummer. and if your really not a jew, then we are brother’s.
And yes you are correct, economically, of course, “abstract” (or “objective”) value does not exist, in monetary matters or elsewhere. In general, the notion that value is objective is “an inveterate fallacy”; and the allied concept that value is measurable in terms of some definedly fixed unit is a “spurious idea.” Simply put, “[t]here is no method available to construct a unit of value.” More specifically, “money is not a standard for the measurement of prices; it is a medium whose exchange ratio varies in the same way * * * in which the mutual exchange ratios of the vendible commodities and services vary.” Furthermore, money can never arise ex nihilo. “The acceptance of a new kind of money presupposes that the thing in question already has, previous exchange value on account of the services it can render directly to consumption or production.” In short, no governmental edict can make something with no previously existing purchasing power either a “unit of value,” or “money” in the economic sense.

Reck,Less:Abandon on
November 8th, 2008 8:27 pm

Rabi Mishko Novosel wrote; Hey Reckless maybe you could be a host and do your own show and show us all how it’s done. The door is always open, email me at rabbi@vornetwork.com and we can talk about it…..
May~be but, Peter IS THE MAN!

Peter is great and we’re lucky to have him, and this last of yours at 8:22pm is correct. Your other posts have been incorrect, either that or incorrectly explained…. I don’t feel like getting into a pissing match with someone that cuts and pastes wikipedia descriptions. I’m still on skype and await your fact filled commentaries and criticisms, hopefully with your help we can correct all the flaws of VOR…

Z.O.G. on
November 8th, 2008 9:18 pm

What are you two arguing about?

K-Sensor on
November 8th, 2008 9:32 pm

I enjoyed the show. thanks guys.

Scott on
November 9th, 2008 2:39 am

This in part, answers the question on why Jews encourage and embrace multiculturalism

There are two primary reasons that Jews promote multi-culturalism, i.e. multi-racialism:

1.) Jews are much better able to blend in and hide themselves among a racially diverse population than a population that is racially homogeneous.

2.) Multi-culturalism/ multi-racialism weakens the host society in which the Jews live, thus enabling the Jews to obtain even more power and control over that society.

Reck,Less:Abandon on
November 9th, 2008 6:38 pm

NOTICE: It’s not Reckless, but, Mister Abandon to you jew boy!
I could never meet your ego, after all, you are morally and intellectually superior. Right, or is it Correct? NOT! May~be you should cut back on the Viagra……

Reck,Less:Abandon on
November 9th, 2008 6:41 pm

Rabi, Next time your here in Oy Vegas, Maybe we could me up @ The Four Seasons and converse over a few drinks.

Z.O.G. on
November 10th, 2008 1:37 am

Reck,Less:Abandon,

Try not using drugs before you post here, okay?

LOL :-D

Reck,Less:Abandon on
November 10th, 2008 1:49 am

I don’t do drugs Z.O.G. I just think Misko cums off like an antichrist self hating supremest jew with a boner for himself, now. Okay!

GEORGE WELLS on
November 10th, 2008 7:57 pm

To Whodareswings.

Hefner is a jewish name, look it up in a book of jewish names. Look at the man’s face and compare to other known jews. Look at his business. Traditional jewish businesses include pornography. drugs, prostitution, money lending. these are easy and profitable ways to get money.

Anyone who helps others to loosen their moral restrains is looked upon as a Messiah. Quess what? Saviors are often jewish. There is always a jew around who wants to save you (jesus among others).

And often they do save you from an aspect of morality or business that as a gentile it is hard, first, to mentally circumvent. They have the know how in this regard.

The great salesmen and business teachers are often jewish They have saved many a man from that great command of god to adam that by the sweat of a man’s brow he must earn his bread all the days of his life. What else would capitalism be invented for? They are the high priests of capitalism.

Hefner probably is jewish. Like a victorious conqueror, He can live off the fat of the land while defoliating his neighbors cherished goods.

GEORGE WELLS on
November 10th, 2008 7:59 pm

“

GEORGE WELLS on
November 10th, 2008 8:05 pm

And the strongest evidence is this: if there were two goats standing out in a field, you might say to me: How do you know the one on the left is a goat? To which I would say: he has been know to spend unreasonably long times with known goats. Just look at him. he also seems to be very attracted to them.

Unbelievable on
November 11th, 2008 11:01 pm

I can’t belive this crap. The sad part about it this, is that one of you idiots could live right next door to me.